The General Inspectorate of Justice (IGJ) stated ineffective and irregular the registration of the trust that leads Santiago Maratea and will appear in court to request the intervention of the Maratea Red Gogó Trustwhich claims to have already raised 800 million pesos to pay debts of the Independent Athletic Club. Specifically, the IGJ will demand the designation of a “inspector informant and controller“because there was a maneuver to register the trust in Neuquén -a district outside the domicile of the club and also outside the domicile of Maratea himself-, because “the collection of public savings” cannot be out of control; the legality of the founding contract cannot be verified; there is a danger that the funds collected will be seized and “the point of trust expenses and fees is exorbitantly scheduled.” According to Neuquén sources, in the original text of the trust, which was only presented in Neuquén, Maratea is assured 35 thousand dollars a month for six months up to a maximum of 5 percent of the proceeds. The new leadership of Independiente, which exhibited a certain alignment with the PRO, “privatized” the collection and left it in the hands of Maratea, something that the IGJ neither legitimizes nor questions: what the organization it leads indicates Ricardo Nisen is that everything is dark, from the address to the trust constitution contract.
The doubts of the control body
From the first day, serious doubts were raised regarding the armed mechanism around Maratea. He himself sowed enormous confusion. First, he said that he would have a benefit of 5 percent of the proceeds, a percentage that sounded huge – up to now it would be 40 million pesos for his pocket – but later he clarified that lawyers, notaries and others would be paid from that 5 percent. bills. Then he said the opposite: that 5 percent was his exclusive profit. And then mixed versions appeared. From Neuquén they affirm that, according to the letter of the precarious contract presented, Maratea ensures 35 thousand dollars a month for six months and that this sum cannot exceed the 5 percent that was discussed from the beginning. In any case, in its resolution the IGJ qualifies as “exorbitant” the part that Maratea takes. A striking fact: the text does not even set what type of dollar those 35 thousand dollars are settled at. It does not specify if it is at the official exchange rate or if it is in bill dollars. Indefinitions such as these constitute irregularities because they exhibit little transparency.
An answer in the networks
Maratea himself went out on the field to refute the criticism that spread on social networks. “Has anyone read what are the irregularities that the IGJ marks? Read guys. Spoiler alert: they are looking ridiculous.”
The truth is that the IGJ text does detail what it considers irregularities. The registration in a district that does not correspond, the failure to present the constitution contract, the exorbitant expenses and the money that Maratea takes, the lack of control in the management of money, among many others.
The arguments of those who support
Some well-known fans and members of Independiente, who support the current collection, exhibited careful responses to the IGJ. Among them, the journalist Carlos Burgueño, who anticipated that “all the required papers will be presented, there will not be a penny missing, and we also call on the IGJ to review what was done in the club so that we have to go out and cover a debt that was generated with corruption.” The obvious reference is to the management of the Moyano in front of the Avellaneda club.
From the club itself contradictory gestures were verified. The one who put the signature was an idol, the goalkeeper Miguel Angel Santoro, and the presentation was made at the Independiente headquarters. But the declarations of the leaders have been rather concise and they always answer that they do not know and are oblivious to the operation of the trust. There are those who argue that the general discredit of soccer leaders makes it impossible to carry out a collection like the current one, headed by the club itself.
Rights of partners and contributors
The IGJ precisely controls the constitution of companies and the modern forms of association to preserve the rights of the citizenry or a part of the citizenry. In this case, particularly the members and fans of Independiente who, excitingly, contribute money to get the institution out of the crisis. That’s why the IGJ warns that there must be a control: The limitations of those who manage the trust must be clear, what is the liquidation procedure, who exactly are the beneficiaries and many more points.
There is a point of utmost importance in the collection and that caught the attention of the Nissen team: the money is kept in Market Paymentwhich is not a financial identity recognized by the Banco Central. It appears as a commercial, non-financial company, says the IGJ. Due to public statements, there are currently deposited the 800 million pesos raised. But nothing is said about the interests that could currently round off a minimum of 70 million pesos per month. There are mentions that interest is already being charged, but it is not clear or documented.
“We are facing the privilege of a separate patrimony of special affectation”, therefore, it must have control so that it does not put Independiente’s patrimony at risk, concludes the IGJ.
“They didn’t present it”
“We don’t ask for anything exceptional,” Nissen told Page 12, in a brief dialogue-. Simply, that they present the trust contract, as we request in all cases. We gave them time. They did not present it. We gave them time again. Neither. Then they said they would do it before May 25. They didn’t. It is obvious that the IGJ should control that there is no fraud to the contributors and Independent. Hence the resolution.”
From these words it can be deduced that Maratea never presented any contract and that he only did so in Neuquén, where he established a “special address”. For the IGJ, this arouses suspicion, because Independiente, as everyone knows, is based in Avellaneda, Province of Buenos Aires, and Maratea has an address on Calle Conde, in CABA. The registration was made in Neuquén because it is a district in which a contract can be presented and the control body does not have the power to review or give an opinion on the content. Both Maratea and Independiente should aspire to more controls, not fewer controls.
Possible next steps
One path that Maratea and Santoro, the other signatory, have is to register the trust properly in the IGJ and submit to the control that all companies and all trusts have. In its resolution, the agency lists all the times it intervened in similar cases and that, in addition, led to legal proceedings.
If there is no registration in the next few days, the IGJ will appear, surely before the Civil Justice, so that a judge appoints an auditor-observer, who verifies everything that is done and objects to irregularities if there are any.
Those who know the world of companies affirm that, without control, trusts son like offshore companies: they handle gigantic figures regardless of all regulations.
